| Final Order / Judgement | CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area (Behind Qutub Hotel) New Delhi – 110016 Case No.312/2016 Charan Singh S/o Late Shri Hari Singh R/o GC-1A/1, Pul Pehladpur New Delhi-110044. …..COMPLAINANT Vs. - M/s Bharat Petroleum Gas Corporation Ltd.
Through The Chairman Bharat Bhavan 4 and 6 Currimbhoy Road Ballard Estate Mumbai 400001. - M/s Anand Gas Service
Office at 379/B Main Mathura Road Badarpur, Gurdwara, South-East New Delhi-110044. …..RESPONDENT Date of Institution-13.10.2016 Date of Order-04.10.2024 O R D E R RITU GARODIA-MEMBER - The complaint pertains to deficiency in service on the part of OP in providing underweight gas cylinder to the complainant.
- The complainant is a consumer of OP2, M/s Anand Gas Service vide consumer no. 40239, S.V. No. 509516658 since 06.12.2010. The complainant booked a gas cylinder on 08.07.2014 which was delivered on 10.07.2014 by gas agency delivery boy. It is alleged that the complainant asked him to weigh the cylinder but the boy said that he did not have a weighing machine.
- The complainant received a cylinder with the delivery slip bearing no. 845923. The said slip mentions the “weight as 15.5 kg.” The complainant, on weighing the cylinder, found that the cylinder was 26.8 kg instead of 29.7 kg. He called OP2 and complained about the weight of the cylinder. It is alleged that OP2 disconnected his gas connection without any reason thereafter. The complainant filled the KYC form and complained to officers of OP1 i.e. Bharat Gas Corporation Services.
- On 05.09.2014, a Deputy Manager Sales of OP1 visited the house of the complainant and prepared a cylinder inspection report. The cylinder weighed 2.6 kg as per the inspection report. The complainant made another complaint on 15.09.2014 to OP1. It is submitted that OP2 BPCL imposed a penalty of Rs.5,40,620/- on the agency for supply of less quantity of gas and for fake connections. The complainant also made an application under RTI Act to OP1 seeking information about the action taken against OP2.
- OP1 in its reply submits that the relationship between OP1 and OP2 is on principal to principal basis as per clause 17 of distributorship agreement. OP1 further submits that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and OP1.
- OP1 explains that each cylinder is manufactured by BIS approved manufacturer and filled with 14.2 kg of LPG. The cylinder goes through series of quality checks and are sealed thereafter. The distributors also carries out a quality control check of the cylinders.
- OP1 states that the complaint is barred by limitation as the cause of action arose on 08.07.2014 and the complaint was filed after two years.
- OP1 admits that the deputy manager, sales, visited the house of the complainant. On inspection, the cylinder was found to weigh less to an extent of 2.6 kg. The underweight cylinder was exchanged with a new refilled cylinder having the correct weight of 14.2 kg. The complainant accepted the said cylinder. OP1 also submits that a penalty of Rs.5,40,620/- had been imposed on OP2.
- OP2 in its reply states that OP2 is a LPG distributor of BPCL Limited. The said distributorship is governed by LPG control order dated 24.05.2000. The penalties to be imposed in case of wrongdoing against a distributors comes under the purview of the said order.
- OP2 has denied delivery of underweight cylinder. OP2 also questions the veracity of the complainant’s claim as the cylinder was not weighed before taking delivery.
- OP2 alleges that the complainant and his nephew wanted to grab the property of OP2 and filed several civil and criminal complaints.
- The complainant has not filed any rejoinder to the averments of OP1.
- The complainant in his rejoinder to OP2 has repeated the averments made in the complaint. The complainant has also denied any property dispute between the parties.
- Complainant has filed evidence by way of an affidavit and has exhibited the following documents:
- Copy of complaint is exhibited as Annexure “A”.
- Copy of inspection & delivery report is exhibited as Annexure “B”.
- Copy of police complaint is exhibited as Annexure “C”.
- Copy of order dated 05/09/2014 is exhibited as Annexure “D”.
- Copy of complaints of another consumer is exhibited as Annexure “E”.
- Copy of RTI application and its reply is exhibited as Annexure “F”.
- OP-1 has filed evidence by way of an affidavit and has exhibited the following documents:
- Copy of Power of Attorney is exhibited as Annexure-A.
- Copy of Distributorship agreement is exhibited as Annexure-B.
- Right to filed evidence by OP-2 was closed vide order dated 15.03.2019.
- The Commission has gone through the pleadings and documents on record. Perusal of the file shows that a complainant is a consumer of OP2. He received a gas cylinder from OP2. Receipt dated 09.07.2014 shows that a LPG cylinder has been delivered to the complainant for Rs.414/-. The complainant complained about the underweight cylinder and OP-2 carried out an inspection. The inspection report by OP-1, Bharat Petroleum Gas Corporation Ltd is dated 05.09.2014. The cylinder in dispute was exchanged on the same day. The complaint was filed on 13.10.2016.
- Section 24A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 states that
- “The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.
- Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Forum, the State Commission or National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint with such period:
Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission, the State Commission or the District Forum, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay. - The cause of action occurred on 09.07.2014 and 05.09.014 and the complaint was filed on 13.10.2016. The complainant has not given any reasons for delay in not filing the complaint within two years from the date of cause of action. Hence, as per Section 24A, the present complaint is filed beyond the limitation period as prescribed in Consumer Protection Act and the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.
- Order to be uploaded and complied with within 30 days and file be consigned to record room.
| |
